Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Obama fan base to voters: La-La-La, I can't hear you

DCblogger's picture

I don't mean to keep on picking on Booman, but here, and more succinctly here, he maintains that all is well in Obama land.

Michael Whitney has a run down of just how bad it looks for Dems as of now.

Quick review for those who have not gotten the memo: Dems lost the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and NJ. Dems just lost a Senate race in Massachusetts on the issue of health care deform. Voters don't like what Democrats are doing.

If the Republicans hide the scary the way Scott Brown did in Massachusetts, they will win. That might be bad for the country, but that won't stop it from happening.

And writing screeds against Jane Hamsher and playing enforcer is only going to make it worse.

0
No votes yet

Comments

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

The fact that Obama can bamboozle progressives is so exciting to The Young Operatives. What he actually does is really immaterial to them.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by...

1. "That might be bad for the country." How will shuffling legacy-party deck chairs about change anything?
2. "Writing screeds against Jane Hamsher and playing enforcer is only going to make it worse." I'm happy to call out any and all low-blow two-minutes hate attacks, but what is it going to make worse and how?

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

I was refering to the OFB. They alienated many voters in the course of the primaries. Obama has alienated many more with his disaster capitalism presidency. If the OFB attacks Jane, they only make it worse for Obama and the Dems.

attacking Jane is not going to fix anything. Obama is not losing support because FDL refuses to clap louder, he is losing support because he is doing bad stuff.

as to my previous point, I believe that things will be worse if the Republicans take over. It will mean that we will have congressional investigations into Obama's birth certificate. It will increase the chance that social security will be destroyed.

I don't suggest anyone try to save the Democrats. They have made it clear that we are not wanted in the party, so the sensible thing to do is shop around for candidates who do want our support. I am just saying what I think is going to happen.

dblhelix's picture
Submitted by dblhelix on

And writing screeds against Jane Hamsher and playing enforcer is only going to make it worse.

Over the past year, various PACs/groups have collected a whole lot of money. Now that the FEC info for 2009 is coming out, it's perfectly normal to see people rummaging through the filings.

At the end of the day, these blogs/orgs will be judged on the basis of their effectiveness. Hamsher (and others) has been penning screeds about the ineffectiveness of existing interest orgs like NARAL, etc for some time now. Motives have been questioned. Why should she not be subjected to the same criticism? They're all competing for the same space: the dollars of well-intentioned activists, who, IMO, are not getting squat for their trouble.

Take this "bold progressives" outfit as an example. $1.3 mill in receipts for this PO nonsense. Another 1/2 mill or so for the "Progressive Block." Now ppl are taking a hard look at what Accountability Now/FDL is doing. So? I see over $2 mill in donor contribs just for the efforts mentioned in this paragraph. Should their be no transparency? That's quite a chunk of change.

I'm not going to defend or attack Hamsher in particular. What I am saying is that today we've seen pre-capitulation on the drilling issue, pretty much across-the-board at "progressive" blogs. So if anyone out there wants to hit me up for $$ based on "accountability" or "progressive advocacy," it's time to put up or shut up, meaning -- I get to judge whether the effort is viable and transparent, and that does include assessing recent history.

Submitted by lambert on

"Incrementalism" is another name for "perpetual fundraising" -- with an ever-receding horizon for actual results delivered. Just like at [a|the] [strong|robust|triggered]? public [health insurance?] [option|plan]